comment #1

MathewM says ...

Girls like diamonds and hate violence. Girls make up half of the movie going public. Blood Diamond never really had a chance.

comment #2

tholl-yung says ...

iamanerd, you asked 2 posts ago about APOC's production budget. Also, there was a recent story about Disney's $$$ situation in one of the trades, that I'll try to find later.

http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/cl-ca-apocalypto3dec03,0,197783.story
"Gibson's self-financed passion project was originally budgeted through his Icon Productions at $64 million. Despite the twofold increase in shooting days, that initial figure has been whittled down to $50 million for public record. However, production execs who worked on and or regularly visited the set estimate 'Apocalypto's' actual budget is closer to $75 million to $80 million."

I wonder, on a comparative basis, how that translates to a film without cheap labor (i.e. unions) and with stars, which is the case with "Blood Diamond." Also, is there a typical director's salary in the 75-80mil? By example, I think del Toro got 20mil to direct -- that comes from here.
http://reporter.blogs.com/risky/2006/11/del_toro.html)

comment #3

Breedlove says ...

this surprises me. ed zwick is a pretty commercial filmmaker, i thought this would be a hit. why would this only make 8 mil opening weekend?

and that del toro link didn't work, is guillermo del toro really getting $20 mil to direct something? that doesan' seem right either.

but what do i know?

p.s. don't listen to jeff, 'apocolypto' kicks serious ass. great movie.

comment #4

tholl-yung says ...

my bad.
http://reporter.blogs.com/risky/2006/11/del_toro.html
The quote is, "He put his entire salary back into the movie, which cost about $20 million." I can't tell if she saying his salary cost 20mil or the movie did, the former seems possible and later impossible.

comment #5

insidah says ...

I'm going to see Apocalypto just to spite the assholes who called for a GIBSON boycott. To me, THEY are the most dangerous people. Let's call them the unforgiving. Or simple minded.

comment #6

bachelorcool says ...

I think you'll find that the budget for del Toro's film was indeed 20million, though whether that's euros or dollars would have to be checked. An amazing achievement whichever.

comment #7

VedaPierce says ...

Why does it take $80 to $100 million to make a movie like "Blood Diamond"? And did the producers honestly think that a film with this subject matter -- regardless of word of mouth -- would gross that much? This is basically the same movie as "The Constant Gardener" only with diamonds...how much did that cost?

comment #8

Circumvrent says ...

T. Holly, it seems like the reporter's saying that Del Toro put his salary INTO the film's $20 million dollar budget. Either way, it's poor writing on the reporter's part.

comment #9

Noel Murray says ...

Saw APOCALYPTO last night in my small-town red-state multiplex in a half-full house (not bad for a subtitled movie with no stars), and the audience was really into it. I'm not predicting that this is going to be a blockbuster, but I bet it'll be a solid earner through the holiday season. Word of mouth is going to be pretty strong.

comment #10

jjgittes says ...

A quick scan of Rottentomatoes shows how off the wuss factor wing of the film critics in this country are. "Apocalypto" may not be a great movie, but it's a damn good one and there are a bunch of middling 2 star reviews with the "oh it's so violent" reservations.

I'm glad it's number 1 because , it deserves to be. "Blood Diamond" is a Zwick-bore fest as usual, his middle brow sensibilities all over it.

I can't believe DiCaprio has Oscar heat for this role - he's not that good in it (though he does he try), his accent is off, I didn't buy him for one second onscreen. I am still baffled by the people who thought the race was between Leo and Smith when the race has always been about O'Toole and Smith.

The only Oscar heat BD should get is for Supporting Actor.

comment #11

nola says ...

I believe the Constant Gardner was made for less than 18 million. There are big starts and producers on BD. I'm sure they all got their million dollar fees.

DeBeers must be happy.

comment #12

dre says ...

I'm happy for Apocalypto because it is a very solid piece of rich entertainment. I didn't hate Blood Diamond the way so many have and am very surprised at its poor box office showing. zwick does make commercial films and it does have leo...very surprsing.

comment #13

jeffmcm says ...

The "from the director of The Last Samurai" ads probably hurt as much as they helped.

comment #14

Hallick says ...

Good filmmaking or not, if Apocalypto (sorry, "MEL GIBSON'S APOCALYPTO") is number one, that's an enormous achievement for Gibson. An extremely graphic foreign language film (without the Jesus factor) which puts the tainted name of its maker right up there above the title in the trailers, and still comes out on top for the weekend is one of the year's real movie milestones.

comment #15

Dixon Steele says ...

T.H., There is NO WAY del Toro gets $20 million to direct. They're talking about the cost of the movie. Sheesh.

Nola, Constant Gardener was made for $25 million, with money coming in from foreign pre-sales, the UK and Focus.

Just came back from BLOOD DIAMOND, and VedaPierce is right. Who at Warners thought plowing $80-$100 million was a good idea? It's relentlessly depressing and violent, not to mention SO heavy-handed, Zwick at his worst. UGH!

Jeff, you think Leo is a bonafide contender for Best Actor fot this stinker? Why, because of his accent? Jesus...

comment #16

The Movie Man says ...

Just go back from APOCALYPTO, the film is as excessive and absurd as you'd expect from a film helmed by Gibson, but it works in spite of itself. People can say whatever they like but Gibson has the goods as a filmmaker, the movie is intense and feverish and exciting. If Gibson could ever get his head out of his ass (and leave the screenwriting duties to someone other than himself or a lacky) he could really do something. The film is an entertaining, well staged, very silly B movie, no more, no less, and one of the more entertaining films I've seen this year.

comment #17

tholl-yung says ...

You're right Dix, Peter Jackson broke the barrier getting 20mil for King Kong. Ron Howard got 10mil for DVC. I couldn't believe Pan's Lab could be made for 20mil, so I thought maybe, del Toro got 20mil and no backend. What do you think del Toro got and did he add that to the 20mil budget? What do you think Gibson's directing fee should be valued at on APOC?

comment #18

jeffmcm says ...

Peter Jackson was also getting paid for writing and producing.

comment #19

Dixon Steele says ...

T.H., I'm sure Del Toro gets less for a foreign production than for, say, HELLBOY. Probably less than $1 million for PAN'S...

Gibson's own company, Icon, funded APOCALYPTO, so he's essentially paying himself (they own the film). Still, he's probably getting at least $5 mill. up front as Director/Co-Writer from the production budget.

comment #20

Craig Kennedy says ...

I just got back from Apocalypse Mel and found it to be mainly a snooze. A few cool moments, but too leaden to be a good action film and too empty to be a good message film. The last half hour or so was solid, but I wouldn't have minded cutting out about 30 minutes of the first two thirds.

comment #21

jeffmcm says ...

I disagree, the last act was where I would have done all the trimming. The middle act needed expansion.

comment #22

Craig Kennedy says ...

Interesting jeffmcm. If the film really wanted to be something deep and meaninful I would agree with your suggestion, but by that point in the film I'd given up on depth. It was clear the movie was going to fail at delivering in an intellectual sense and I just wanted visceral thrills by that point. The ones in the last 30 minutes were pretty much cliche' but they were at least entertaining.

I don't know if it was because of the actor who played the head of the 'evil' Mayans or an image from the end of the film (which I won't describe because it might be a spoiler), but I kept thinking of The New World and I'm wondering now how Malick would've approached similar material. For the record, I've always admired Malick without ever obsessing over his films, but I really loved The New World.